Posted on 07/17/2005 5:16:14 PM PDT by grellis
THIS THREAD IS INTENDED FOR READERS THAT HAVE COMPLETED THE BOOK! If you have not yet read the book, consider yourself warned: There will be spoilers on this thread.
For my fellow FReepers who have no intention of reading the book but would like to discuss the more controversial issues related to the work, I am asking you as politely as I can: DO NOT HIJACK THIS THREAD. We are all members of this forum and as such, it is not up to me to disallow anyone from participating in the discussion. That is why I am asking you--please do not hijack this thread. If you would like to discuss the more controversial aspects of the book, maybe you could start your own thread and ping us over there. If we are interested, we'll come.
Now, here's what has been bothering me lately: it turns out Snape was the eavesdropper who sent Voldemort to Harry's parents. However, in Goblet of Fire, Dumbledore testifies that Snape returned to the good side before Voldemort's downfall and turned spy at great personal risk.
In Half Blood Prince, on the other hand, Dumbledore suggests (I think pretty much states) that Snape returned to the good based on his terrible remorse after Voldemort killed Harry's parents. Since his failed attempt to kill Harry at the same time was Voldemort's downfall, and earlier Dumbledore said Snape came back prior to that downfall, isn't this inconsistent?
In other words, how can Snape have returned to the side of good based on his remorse at causing the death of Harry's parents (as stated in Half Blood Prince), and yet have returned to the good side prior to that occurrence (from the Pensieve scene in Goblet of Fire)?
Sorry this post isn't making much sense.
VERY good (it almost gave me shivers, LOL!)!
The Yankees are like Democrats -- they think that throwing money at a problem is the way to solve it. They also have a sense of entitlement that I find particularly disgusting.
I'm a Mets fan and a Red Sox fan. Yes, they spend money, but they also don't have a sense of entitlement about championships. Therefore, when they do win one, it's that much more special.
I am a single female living in Manhattan, and my mother wonders why I'm still not married. I tell her it's my high standards -- no Democrats or Yankee fans need apply. :-D
No, the timing as written is definitely off. I have to think that either Snape returned after finding out that the Potters were the target, but before their deaths (prophecy comes before Harry's birth, they aren't killed for another fifteen months) or that Dumbledore is allowing Harry to believe that remorse over the Potters is why Snape returned, while the truth is something else. I would go with Door #2, because it seems to me Snape must have had a better reason, and done something more than we know, to return and to have D trust him so implicitly.
But that's a good catch, it's definitely written oddly. Maybe she wants to draw attention to how illogical that train of thought is...
:o)
LOL!
I had some kind of crazy idea that Snape isn't the same Snape. Maybe polyjuice potion and something to do with Regulus Black? But I'm not sure you can take polyjuice potion to impersonate someone who is dead, and there are no indications of Snape drinking anything on a regular basis.
"No, I didn't mean to upset you." Someone translated it for me a few posts later.
I really don't want Snape to be dead. I think it would throw a lot of the plot off kilter.
I wasn't upset, I was just responding to your question.
No, you didn't upset me. :o)
LOL--that was the answer to my question! I couldn't figure out what Ron meant when he said "node iddum eentup sechew" with his mouth full of food...sockmonkey was able to figure out that it reads "No, I didn't mean to upset you."
Wait...are you pulling my leg??!
Voldy has his wand. Remember in GOF his wand and Harry's perform some sort of "reverse spell" thing where all the people he killed were revealed in a ghostlike form including James, who helps guide Harry back to the portkey so he can return to Hogwarts.
GOOD POINT! Thanks.
LOL!
i think that it might not be at grimmald place because remember when mundungas got caught stealing from sirius's house by harry, what if he stole the locket?
yea but i think the locket might not be at grimmauld place any more because when harry caught mundungus with some of sirius's old things he might have stolen the locket.
Your post brings something to mind. Who were all of the people that Voldemort killed that come out of the wand? There are Cedric, the Potters, the old caretaker and VM's father, grandfather and grandmother. I don't have my books with me, but is that all?
Now, ignore Cedric as Voldie didn't kill him. That leaves six murders. We (Dumbledore) assume there are six horcrux. If a horcrux has to be made soon after the murder, the ones at the Riddle house would probably be the ring, the locket, and the diary. The two at the Potter's are unknown unless one is Harry. The old caretaker would have provided the murder for the snake, or something else in the old house.
If my facts are wrong let me know. The assumptions are mine. I assume these were all of Voldie's murders since they came out of the wand, but if he used another wand elsewhere we don't see it. Also, I don't remember if he killed the caretaker or if Wormtail did it on Voldie's order. That would mean we need to find another murder by Voldie. It could also lead to Harry being a horcrux in a strange twist of logic.
I am reading the whole series again--it has finally been returned to me after a long loan. In Sorcerer's Stone, when DD and McGonagall are outside the Dursley's waiting for Hagrid with the baby HP, DD mentions that 11 long years of terror are finally over. He also makes mention of the scores of murders that VM has committed. I have forgotten all of this over the past few years.
When faced with religous bigotry just say, "Yeah, the Catholics thought of that first and think the same thing about you. Good thing I'm a Catholic."
Shuts them up real fast.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.